Virtual servers are usually logged by the server host, so this creates privacy concerns. Often times VPNs will use cheap virtual servers or low-quality (cheap) physical servers instead of expensive dedicated premium servers. I suspect this may be due to their overloaded servers – but there’s no way to know for sure because they don’t provide a server status page with real-time bandwidth.įurthermore, there is very little information about the quality of the servers – another concerning factor. PureVPN works hard to emphasize its large server network, but the network suffers from various connection problems, which I observed when testing for my PureVPN review. Both PureVPN and Private Internet Access are slow VPNs. This too is no fluke, as you can see in our Surfshark vs PureVPN comparison, where Surfshark crushed PureVPN in every speed test. Surfshark was more than 18 times as fast as PureVPN when connecting from our lab to the UK. The best result I got was a speed of 59 Mbps: Here is the result of one of my PureVPN speed tests with a US server. I conducted speed tests for both VPNs using the 500 Mbps internet connection in my US testing facility. These problems with reliability also match up with feedback I have gotten from other PureVPN users.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |